View Full Version : Tony Blair
Are you sad of seeing him go ?
animal magic
27-09-06, 06:40 PM
no just glad he is going only george bush left
Not at all.
Took the country to war by lying to Parliament. I hope he is taken to a war crimes tribunal.
Why ? Always thought he was a decent man. His speech was brilliant methinks.
"A decent man" :haha:
He's a politician FFS.
animal magic
27-09-06, 06:42 PM
i dont think gordon brown is going to be any better
Yeah he is BUT, name me one man better than him in the current political scenery in britain ?
Politicians are in a no-win situation every time as it's impossible to satisfy the masses completely ... that's pure mathematics.
Not at all.
Took the country to war by lying to Parliament. I hope he is taken to a war crimes tribunal.
I don't think he lied. I think he made a monumental mistake, but I don't think he lied.
I won't be sad to see him go. More pertinently though, I won't be sad to see the back of this fucking Labour Party Conference. My route to work is right through the middle of the 'Conference zone' and it is bloody mayhem. :rant:
animal magic
27-09-06, 06:45 PM
I don't think he lied. I think he made a monumental mistake, but I don't think he lied.
I won't be sad to see him go. More pertinently though, I won't be sad to see the back of this fucking Labour Party Conference. My route to work is right through the middle of the 'Conference zone' and it is bloody mayhem. :rant:
when does it finish because i am in manchester on friday
I don't think he lied. I think he made a monumental mistake, but I don't think he lied.
I won't be sad to see him go. More pertinently though, I won't be sad to see the back of this fucking Labour Party Conference. My route to work is right through the middle of the 'Conference zone' and it is bloody mayhem. :rant:
:D
You should have stopped by and watched his speech. Some likened it to that famous Churchill speech ages ago. ;)
Well what's the definition of lying? It's always been a contentious one. At the end of the day, David Kelly RIP told the country that Tony Blair sexed up the dossier on Iraq' WMDs and he ended up with a bullet in his head. Your guess is as good as mine as to what the origin of that bullet was.
David Kelly was right, Blair took the country to war based on lies told to Parliament and he should suffer the consequences.
:D
You should have stopped by and watched his speech. Some likened it to that famous Churchill speech ages ago. ;)
And another thing...he came to where I work today. For the last week, the whole place has been disrupted by workmen laying new floors and painting all the walls. Just for him. Today has been chaos, with security levels going through the fucking roof and my normal exit from the building TRASHED by having to walk a maze-like journey just to get out of the God-forsaken place.
Well what's the definition of lying? It's always been a contentious one. At the end of the day, David Kelly RIP told the country that Tony Blair sexed up the dossier on Iraq' WMDs and he ended up with a bullet in his head. Your guess is as good as mine as to what the origin of that bullet was.
David Kelly was right, Blair took the country to war based on lies told to Parliament and he should suffer the consequences.
To have been in power for so long, what is coming around for him is inevitable i think.
:D
You should have stopped by and watched his speech. Some likened it to that famous Churchill speech ages ago. ;)
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh YES!
http://www.churchill.com/images/dog.jpg
And another thing...he came to where I work today. For the last week, the whole place has been disrupted by workmen laying new floors and painting all the walls. Just for him. Today has been chaos, with security levels going through the fucking roof and my normal exit from the building TRASHED by having to walk a maze-like journey just to get out of the God-forsaken place.
He's a public figure and that's quite understandable mate. Imagine Elvis coming back from the dead and visiting your building. :D
animal magic
27-09-06, 06:53 PM
i think elvis would be more popular than blair :D
Alvin Stardust is more popular than Blair these days :haha:
animal magic
27-09-06, 06:55 PM
Alvin Stardust is more popular than Blair these days :haha:
it could be worse it could have been gary glitter :)
Assassin
27-09-06, 06:57 PM
Tony Blair = Bellend
Neil Young
27-09-06, 10:28 PM
I don't think he lied. I think he made a monumental mistake, but I don't think he lied.
I won't be sad to see him go. More pertinently though, I won't be sad to see the back of this fucking Labour Party Conference. My route to work is right through the middle of the 'Conference zone' and it is bloody mayhem. :rant:
He either lied or, as you say, he made an enormous error of judgment. It's all very well when you hear people defending Blair on the grounds that "hindsight is 20/20" etc. but we have to remember that others, including Hans Blix and Mohammed El Baradei, were saying at the time that there weren't WMD in Iraq. What are leaders for but to get the big decisions right?
He either lied or got it wrong. Either way he should have resigned in shame ages ago.
mick the click
27-09-06, 11:17 PM
...but the next twat will be Gordon Brown FFS....puke...look after yer wallets chaps...
CharlieMansonsSquint
28-09-06, 12:51 AM
I don't think he lied. I think he made a monumental mistake, but I don't think he lied.
I won't be sad to see him go. More pertinently though, I won't be sad to see the back of this fucking Labour Party Conference. My route to work is right through the middle of the 'Conference zone' and it is bloody mayhem. :rant:
I don't think he lied, given bad intelligence maybe, or likely, and then he made the mistake of agreeing to be Bush's bitch, going to war to keep him sweet.
Hopefully one eye will have more spine and less spin.
alunevans
28-09-06, 01:23 AM
I wonder if Robin Cook would have been a viable candidate for the leadership if he'd lived. I often felt that after his resignation over the war that many on the left and centre left may have pushed his candidature. We'll never know now.
Mumsafan
28-09-06, 09:11 AM
I've never liked him. Too smarmy! He's been categorised by me in the same pot as Mourinho - "Slimey bastard waiter types"
I've always thought he was alright.
Red_hot
28-09-06, 09:13 AM
Yes. I think that he is a decent human being who genuinely wanted to make a difference and cares about people.
Anfield Mole
28-09-06, 12:32 PM
Are you sad of seeing him go ?
Don't you mean
Are you sad to see him go ?
I am
Slammer
28-09-06, 12:40 PM
Politicians mean nowt to me, whoever comes in and replaces Blair will have his/her's own idea's how to get more money out of the likes of us! Can't stand em never vote so can't really have a say!!
alunevans
28-09-06, 12:42 PM
I'll avoid the politics of it because people know my view that what he did in Iraq was tantamount to mass murder. So I'll keep my response personal.
I met him quite a few times. He was always civil and polite. I was on a committe of about 20 people he was heading because he was shadow employment minister at the time. I was put on the committee at the arse end really just as they were basically dotting the i's and crossing the t's.
It was a committee that had a two year task to do and I was there for the final two to three meetings. Pretty pointless really.
My contribution was nil for that reason. In fact, one of the meetings was during that hurricane were the actor Gorden Kaye from Allo Allo almost died, and I was the only one who turned up apart from the Dep Gen Sec of the TGWU. So that meeting never even happened.
I met him again a year or two later and he pulled me to one side to say he'd never got the chance to thank me proprely but that my input into the committee was invaluable and he was really grateful for helping him through some difficult moments.
I think I was meant to be flattered and believe my own press. But it just made me think "why did you say that?" because I know that I did absolutely zilch because there was nothing really left to do. And there WERE no difficult moments. I don't even recall there being a vote taken at any stage because all the business was basically done.
If someone is that genuine, why use craven untrue flattery that way? My own view is that most people in politics (certainly at a lower level) wish to believe they are terribly important and so this kind of flattery gets people onside.
For me it did the exact opposite. It just made me think he was being smarmy. Which he clearly was. Because he was giving me false praise in the hope that I'd think he was the bees knees.
Red_Polo
28-09-06, 05:59 PM
I don't think he lied. I think he made a monumental mistake, but I don't think he lied.
I won't be sad to see him go. More pertinently though, I won't be sad to see the back of this fucking Labour Party Conference. My route to work is right through the middle of the 'Conference zone' and it is bloody mayhem. :rant:
I think he lied to himself. Then he lied to us. That's how it usually works.
Assassin
28-09-06, 06:22 PM
Yes. I think that he is a decent human being who genuinely wanted to make a difference and cares about people.
FLMAO
He`s a politician FFS, he only intrested in bùllshitting all day long along with all the other parasites at the expense of you and every other tax payer in the UK
Red_Polo
28-09-06, 06:26 PM
The thing is if everyone has an attitude like that then nobody good is ever going to get into politics.
Assassin
28-09-06, 06:30 PM
The thing is if everyone has an attitude like that then nobody good is ever going to get into politics.
Exactly. All politicians should have performance based contracts its the only way to get rid of all the freeloaders
mersey86
28-09-06, 06:34 PM
Considering I grew up when Thatcher was in power, I think England has been much, much better led by Tony Blair. I've always had the impression that he is a decent man .. and I, like many, generally consider the words "politician" and "decent" to be mutually exclusive. I'll be sad to see him go in the manner that he will be leaving - it all started out so well all those years ago - but the time has definitely come for a change.
Red_hot
28-09-06, 06:34 PM
That's balls. He has a wife and kids that he clearly loves. I don't think that he is just a cold hearted power crazed maggie Thatcher type. I think he does actually care about people.
(Replying to Arsonfire btw)
Red_Polo
28-09-06, 06:50 PM
That's balls. He has a wife and kids that he clearly loves.
Yeah, but so do many a rapist/brutal tyrant/murderer. Still, nice to see the PR job's working on some people :D
Red_hot
28-09-06, 06:53 PM
Yeah, but so do many a rapist/brutal tyrant/murderer. Still, nice to see the PR job's working on some people :D
Well maybe I'm just naive then. Either way I think he seems like a decent bloke and I reckon there are a lot worse prime ministers we could have (and have) had.
Red_hot
28-09-06, 07:01 PM
Not at all.
Took the country to war by lying to Parliament. I hope he is taken to a war crimes tribunal.
That is a ridiculous statement.
alunevans
28-09-06, 07:10 PM
That is a ridiculous statement.
Not necessarily ya know. Theres a very strong argument that says the Iraqi War broke international law. If that was the case and that argument were to prove founded then that'd be the appropriate place for anyone guilty of that.
Red_hot
28-09-06, 07:15 PM
So does anyone here think Tony Blair just fancied a bit of a war then? I think that's rubbish. I think he made a mistake but that is all.
So does anyone here think Tony Blair just fancied a bit of a war then?
:haha:
Not necessarily ya know. Theres a very strong argument that says the Iraqi War broke international law. If that was the case and that argument were to prove founded then that'd be the appropriate place for anyone guilty of that.
Then wouldnt parliment be up on trial aswell? Well atleast the people who voted to go to war! People were presented facts that they belived to be true, and which i belived Tony Blair thought were true.
I dont think he is a Bad man, he has tried to pull America along with International thinking over the years. If it wasnt for him i think they wouyld be even more isolated, due to there idiot of a President!
Red_hot
28-09-06, 07:19 PM
:haha:
:D
alunevans
28-09-06, 07:21 PM
I think, as he said in his speech this week, he was very concerned about Britain losing influence with the USA and so stayed close to them. How did he describe it. "Get too distance from our US allies and you will find its a long way back."
I think he was well aware that there were no WMD's which is why the evidence in the run up to war was so manipulated and doctored.
I think the average citizen who listened to experts from military journals and organisations like Janes Weekly or the ISSS strategic review could tell there were no WMDs.
Given there was no international approval for the war, given that they went outside the auspices of the UN to wage it, and given that weapons inspectors were still searching but stating that they didn't think there were any WMD's and so it wasn't at all a war of last resort, then this war could well be argued to be a war of aggression.
To quote Wikipedia: "Under the Nuremberg Principles, the supreme international crime is that of commencing a war of aggression, because it is the crime from which all war crimes follow. The definition of such a crime is planning, preparing, initiating, or waging a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements, or assurances. Also, participating in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any such act constitutes such a crime."
In which case this could be argued to be a war crime. He won't end up in the dock I know, and nor will Bush, but I think it's valid to say he has a case to answer.
The Glove
28-09-06, 07:55 PM
France and Russia had all the oil deals with Saddam so they wer'nt exactly gonna join up for invading, knowing their cheapo oil was gonna disappear, they were always gonna be against it so you can hardly say that they were right as they didnt give a shit as much as the next government.
Oh and David kelly was the person in line to take the blame for the 'sexed up' dosier so I doubt they had him killed given he was about to get the balme for it all.
Well maybe I'm just naive then. Either way I think he seems like a decent bloke and I reckon there are a lot worse prime ministers we could have (and have) had.
True. We could have had 'Two Jags': :shake:
True. We could have had 'Two Jags': :shake:
To be fair, Two Jabs apologised yesterday!!! :whatever: :shake:
I'm not convinced that the general public can and will warm to Gordon Brown, which will start to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of Labour Party Members, when it comes to the vote for the next leader.
A lot can happen in the next 12 months, but maybe, just maybe Mr Brown wont be our next PM. (Which'll piss him right off! :D)
kurtangle01
29-09-06, 09:57 AM
I won't be sad to see him go but when you look at who's lined up to replace him as Prime Minister...:sigh:
Mumsafan
29-09-06, 09:57 AM
I won't be sad to see him go but when you look at who's lined up to replace him as Prime Minister...:sigh:
Yeah too many Jocks in our government :D
kurtangle01
29-09-06, 09:59 AM
Yeah too many Jocks in our government :D
:haha:
Check your P.M.:handshake:
Mumsafan
29-09-06, 09:59 AM
OK I will
nobbylad
29-09-06, 10:06 AM
And another thing...he came to where I work today. For the last week, the whole place has been disrupted by workmen laying new floors and painting all the walls. Just for him. Today has been chaos, with security levels going through the fucking roof and my normal exit from the building TRASHED by having to walk a maze-like journey just to get out of the God-forsaken place.
Shaggy...where about is Manc do you work?
Snigger
29-09-06, 12:33 PM
Absolutely not, I hope he, and the rest of his shit party, drown in a vat of Afgan vomit with electrodes attached to their testicles. If Brown becomes PM I'm going on a shooting spree around Westminster in the hoping of hitting the twat.
alunevans
29-09-06, 02:26 PM
France and Russia had all the oil deals with Saddam so they wer'nt exactly gonna join up for invading, knowing their cheapo oil was gonna disappear, they were always gonna be against it so you can hardly say that they were right as they didnt give a shit as much as the next government.
I agree with that 100%.
I think this is a good way of analysing it too as the oil is a key aspect. I think you're right that France and Russia wanted their cheap oil deals. But look at the flip side. If some are getting advantageous treatment, others (USA, UK) were getting uncompetitive deals.
Just as the oil not humanitarian considerations were a key motivator behind the decisions of the likes of France and Russia, I believe it was a key motivator behind the decisions of the USA and UK governments too.
When profit is the real cause for war, there is always some humanitarian pretext to feed the public. Look at World War One, who'd argue now that this was a humanitarian war? Who can't see this was a profit war these days? Yet at the time, that's certainly not how it was sold.
All wars are sold as humanitarian, but hardly any are.
Certainly, this war was definitely not about WMD. Like I said earlier, the average informed citizen would know that just by reading public domain expert reports like those from the ISSS (that was released just prior to war by the way) or by listening to the UN Weapons Inspectors themselves.
Neil Young
29-09-06, 02:56 PM
I don't agree it was simply about oil deals. It may have been part of the picture but it wasn't all of it. I think oil supplies, rather than the price, is much closer to the heart of it.
alunevans
30-09-06, 08:46 AM
I don't agree it was simply about oil deals. It may have been part of the picture but it wasn't all of it. I think oil supplies, rather than the price, is much closer to the heart of it.
Yes but if France and Russia have a special relationship which puts them in the hot seat for increasingly scarce supplies and the USA and the UK don't, then the latter will want to reverse that situation. Which they now have done.
I do certainly think The Glove is right though that the likes of France were not operating out of any sense of morality.
I think all governments will basically represent and do the right thing by their own capitalist class.
It just so happens that the interests of the French ruling class differed from, say, the interests of the American ruling class, and so their governments took opposite decisions.
I think he's right that the French government have no special humanitarian claims over this one.
Neil Young
30-09-06, 08:57 AM
Yes but if France and Russia have a special relationship which puts them in the hot seat for increasingly scarce supplies and the USA and the UK don't, then the latter will want to reverse that situation. Which they now have done.
I do certainly think The Glove is right though that the likes of France were not operating out of any sense of morality.
I think all governments will basically represent and do the right thing by their own capitalist class.
It just so happens that the interests of the French ruling class differed from, say, the interests of the American ruling class, and so their governments took opposite decisions.
I think he's right that the French government have no special humanitarian claims over this one.
I certainly agree with that. All I was saying is it was more about the supply rather than the price per se.
There are all sorts of stories - I'm sure you're aware of the argument that the Iraqis had started quoting their oil price in euros as well as dollars. An end to the dollar hegemony would cause the US economy to implode.
Helios Creed
30-09-06, 09:12 AM
I think Blair thought that the public would understand and support his actions after the mass graves were found in Iraq, even if the stated reason for the war had been different.
Neil Young
30-09-06, 09:16 AM
So Helios, basically you're agreeing that he lied to the people and to Parliament, yes?
:)
Helios Creed
30-09-06, 09:24 AM
So Helios, basically you're agreeing that he lied to the people and to Parliament, yes?
:)
I think they used WMDs to make the war "legal" amd were surprised when they didn't find any evidence of them as Sadam was doing everything else you could think of. Doing anything in partnership with Bush is dangerous as he is an evil lying shit .
Neil Young
30-09-06, 09:38 AM
A simple "yes" would have sufficed. :D
Neil Young
30-09-06, 10:01 AM
I think they used WMDs to make the war "legal" amd were surprised when they didn't find any evidence of them as Sadam was doing everything else you could think of. Doing anything in partnership with Bush is dangerous as he is an evil lying shit .
Seriously, if you're right then aren't you outraged that Blair lied? As I said earlier, that really is shameful.
I'd like to see his brother Lionel given a go.
Helios Creed
30-09-06, 12:07 PM
Seriously, if you're right then aren't you outraged that Blair lied? As I said earlier, that really is shameful.
I don't think he strictly lied - if I say I'm going to the shop because we need some milk and I buy the milk we need, but also the beer that I really wanted, I haven't lied, I just haven't told all the facts. We did need milk and I did go and buy it. The trouble is in this case they'd sold out of milk and Blair just came back with the beer. :D
I think Blair did this for the right reasons, but Bush did it to keep in power. It hasn't worked out very well, but I think it needed to be done, I just wish it hadn't been done in alliance with someone who was doing it for the wrong reasons.
Off to the shop now, we need milk.... Ok, and beer. :)
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.